Gay Priests: Vatican Implying Genetic Basis of Homosexuality?
Just a random thought here. It’s probably an illogical fallacy, or some sort of improper reasoning, but here goes:
If the Church will no longer admit homosexual men into seminary, does that mean that the Church believes that homosexuality is something that cannot be changed in a person? Because if the Church thinks homosexuality can be changed (or at least, not acted upon) then they should continue admitting gay men into the priesthood. I mean, isn’t it all about, “Hate the sin, not the sinner”? (Thanks to one of my more dogmatic/histrionic high school religion teachers for drilling THAT phrase into my head over and over and over.)
But since the Church now won’t admit gay men into seminary, then I can only conclude that Ratzi and Co. believe that homosexuality is genetically based, and incapable of being changed (or at least controlled by a vow of chastity and/or actions of celibacy.)
What do you think? Am I reading too deeply into this? I know my logic isn’t spot-on, so help me out.
Thanks to Bookdrunk’s comment over at feministing.com, which got me thinking about this.
Donna said,
September 24, 2005 @ 4:58 pm
I also thought with the whole celibacy thing that a priest’s sexual orientation would not be an issue. How could it matter? Are straight men more likely to remain celibate? I’m totally lost. Thanks for the link and information.
Jen said,
September 26, 2005 @ 4:23 pm
Interesting. What I’m wondering is how they are going to be able to tell who is gay. It’s not like a blood test or something can determine that. Do they just screen out people based on stereotypical behavior?
Genevieve said,
September 28, 2005 @ 4:46 pm
I think that the implication is that you can overcome your homosexuality at a young age, and that if you haven’t, you oughtn’t be a priest. So any priest who admits to being gay is committing a sin. It’s a bit like the US army policy. Is that totally unreasonable?
I wonder if they’ll start asking priests if they ever think about men.